On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 12:06:24PM -0800, meekerdb wrote:
> On 12/23/2011 2:17 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> >>Why? Turing emulability of the physics that supervened on is surely 
> >>irrelevant.
> >
> >Unless it plays a role at some level, like you suggest by
> >attributing a physical activity to something which is not used in
> >a branch, but might be used in another branch, for physical
> >reason. In that case, *such* physical acitvity is relevant, and
> >has to be taken into account in the artificial brain, as it will
> >be in the UD.
> Although we know that brain processes are approximately classical,
> they are not strictly classical.  So is it Russell's hypothesis that
> a strictly classical brain, as in Greg Egan's "The Singleton", would
> obey the 323 principle, but that real brains don't?
> Brent

Nice characterisation. Although I would nuance this by saying that the
multiversal 323 principle is far from obvious, and requires proof
before being used in an argument.


Prof Russell Standish                  Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics      hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
University of New South Wales          http://www.hpcoders.com.au

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to